THE RISE OF FINANCIAL FRAUD:

SCAMS NEVER CHANGE but DISGUISES DO

BY KIMBERLY BLANTON February 2012

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of financial fraud in the United States is on the rise.

Americans submitted more than 1.5 million complaints about financial and other fraud in 2011 –
a 62 percent increase in just three years – according to the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) annual
“Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book” the most comprehensive database of U.S. fraud trends (see
Figure 1).
Joe Borg, head of Alabama’s securities commission and a leader among state securities regula-
tors, agreed there is a proliferation of fraud, and he largely blames the Internet. His agency had an
unprecedented 31-case backlog of criminal trials involving financial fraud in September 2011. “It’s
not unusual to have 20-25 convictions a year, but when we have 31 backed up – and we’re trying them
as fast as we can – the trend is up,” he said.
Borg ticks off the reasons: “Downturn in the economy. Fear among the public. The idea that the
government can’t protect them anymore. Medical costs are going through the roof. Those are fears.
The Internet is the vehicle. The Internet’s a big, big factor.”
Neil Power, supervisor of the FBI’s Economic Crimes Squad in Boston, said the public is not fully
aware of how pervasive fraud is, because only the most prominent cases, such as Bernard L. Madoff’s
$50 billion Ponzi scheme, are covered by the
Figure 1. Fraud Complaints Filed by Consumers, media. The vast majority of cases fly under the
2001-2010, in Millions
public’s radar. “There is a substantial amount of
1.6 fraud being addressed that’s not being covered,”
he said.
1.2 Many more scammers are never caught by a
regulatory system rife with staff shortages and
inadequate resources. For example, the Securi-
Millions

0.8
ties and Exchange Commission (SEC) admitted in
April 2010 that it has never examined some 3,000
0.4
registered U.S. investment advisers, Investment
News reported. In Canada, only a small percent-
0.0 age of total fraud is reported to law enforcement:
2001 2004 2007 2010
one in three Canadians has been targeted by a
Source: Federal Trade Commission (2012).
scammer, yet only 14 percent of fraud attempts

For more financial literacy information, visit fsp.bc.edu

D
are reported to authorities, according to a 2006 online survey by the Canadian Securities Adminis-
trators.
While the Internet has made financial fraud more pervasive, law enforcement said most online
scams are not much different than those employed by snake oil salesmen in the 19th century and
Florida swamp-land salesmen in the 1960s. Unsuspecting consumers are deceived over and over
again with the same schemes, failing to realize that scammers are infinitely creative in making them
believe they’re offering something new and lucrative.
Scammers may be difficult to recognize, because they constantly alter their disguises. A primary
goal of this report is to provide insight into the disguises con men use to perpetrate their standard
fraud schemes and to recruit victims who may be retirees, members of the military, college students,
the unemployed, homebuyers, investors, low-income families, and others. Cloaked in a new dis-
guise, con men appeal to the individual’s weak spot: a desperate shortage of money before payday, a
need to earn more than the yield on their certificate of deposit, a need to pay medical bills.
Some con men, for example, may position themselves as a sort of rescue squad, swooping in dur-
ing a natural or man-made disaster and offering a product or business opportunity that will amelio-
rate the crisis – and bring untold wealth to investors. Others infiltrate churches where they claim to
be doing God’s work. Church-based scams are the most common form of what law enforcement call
“affinity fraud,” which occurs when con men exploit an interest shared by many potential victims,
whether a religious belief or country club membership. There are affinity scams against Iranian-
Americans, Cubans in Miami, Spanish speakers, Haitian immigrants, and Muslims, among others.
Fraudulent subprime mortgage brokers who were immigrants made loans to homeowners who came
from their home country and spoke their language.
The sources for this report by the Financial Security Project of the Center for Retirement Re-
search at Boston College included dozens of law enforcement, federal and state financial and insur-
ance regulators, the IRS, financial companies and fraud watchdog groups, as well as publicly avail-
able information about civil and criminal cases prosecuted by securities regulators with the federal
SEC and state government.
Section 1 provides background on the influences driving the U.S. fraud trend, primarily the In-
ternet, which has enabled scammers to target millions of people in a single keystroke.
Section 2 will identify four basic categories of fraud and describe them. It will also point out the
occasional innovation, such as a grim scheme to take advantage of the very old or terminally ill by of-
fering a product that is a twist on legitimate life insurance products.
Section 3 will address the central goal of this report: to reveal six common disguises used suc-
cessfully by financial schemers to lure unwitting individuals and pursuade them to turn over their
money. Awareness of these disguises can help individuals recognize – and steer clear of – fraud.
The final section lists tips to avoid fraud that were provided by law enforcement, regulators, and
fraud watchdogs. These tips may help individuals identify suspect behavior, the first step in protect-
ing themselves from becoming one of the millions of victims of financial fraud.
While FTC data reflect the gamut of fraud, this report is limited to fraud involving financial prod-
ucts of all types. This involves any scam that somehow uses or sells a financial product or activity,
real or imagined. It may include hedge funds, company stocks, insurance policies, 401(k) and IRA

2
accounts, online brokerage accounts, mortgages, the online payment system PayPal, even income tax
filings. Rampant Internet fraud involving such things as consumer coupons, Internet gambling, and
sweepstakes is beyond the scope of this report. It also does not address financial products that may
be unsuitable, such as subprime mortgages or high-rate credit cards with hidden fees, early payment
penalties, steep interest rates, or unfair terms that the typical consumer is unable to decipher.

1. INTERNET FUELS INCREASE IN FRAUD

As the incidence of fraud increases, the dollar amount that victims of all types of fraud reported
relinquishing grew sharply, from $343 million in 2002 to $1.5 billion in 2011, the FTC reported.1
Fraud cost victims $2,267, on average, in 2011.
FTC data are the best available but do not capture the scope of financial-product fraud. The agen-
cy tracks only complaints submitted by consumers – and not convictions or civil complaints filed
by state securities regulators and federal and state law enforcement officials. The data are compiled
from consumer complaints submitted to the FTC by agencies such as the FBI’s Crime Complaint
Center, the Better Business Bureau (BBB), the U.S. Postal System, the non-profit Identity Theft As-
sistance Center, which is supported by the financial industry, and the National Fraud Information
Center, which is operated by the non-profit advocacy group National Consumers League.
The complaint data shown in Figure 1 fall into the FTC categories of Fraud and Other consumer
complaints; a third FTC category – Identity Theft – was excluded. The Fraud category includes debt-
collection scams, business opportunities, fraudulent lenders, and advance-fee fraud discussed later
in this report. But it also includes non-financial fraud involving health care products and home ap-
pliances. The Other category includes misleading real estate practices, false debt collection protec-
tion, and deceptive lending, but also auto- and home repair-related complaints.
A former FTC program manager for the Data Book, John Krebs, said the dramatic increase in
fraud reflects, in part, that the agency has enlisted more organizations to supply their complaint
data; that individuals are becoming more aware of the FTC complaint network; and that consumers
are more aware of fraud, especially in the wake of widely publicized credit card fraud at prominent
retailers or Madoff’s spectacular Ponzi scheme.
FBI and state securities officials confirmed they are prosecuting more financial fraud. They iden-
tified three major culprits in the fraud epidemic: the Internet, the 2008 financial market collapse,
and the financial insecurity felt by Americans due to the economic slowdown.
There is also a growing consensus that fraud against seniors is increasing, said Andrew Roth,
former director of fraud education and outreach for the California Department of Corporations, the
state’s securities regulator. Aging baby boomers, who have accumulated substantial assets either
through inheritance, home equity, or a lifetime of saving for retirement, are ripe for abuse.
“They’re a larger and wealthier population than ever,” Roth said.
The Internet has been a boon to scammers, who use social networking sites such as Facebook and
Twitter to commit fraud. The Web makes it easy to commit fraud from international posts. In one

1
Dollar losses represent all FTC fraud categories; Figure 1 includes only Fraud and Other complaints.

3
cutting-edge scam, hackers cracked into individuals’ bank, credit card or other accounts and used
the account holders’ money to carry out transactions or make investments without their authority.
In 2008, a Malaysian hacker received a two-year sentence after the FBI charged he had hacked into
60 Americans’ investment accounts at nine brokerage firms to buy and inflate the price of a stock he
owned, so that he could sell it for a profit.
With the advent of the Internet, “the perpetrators are anyone,” said Jason Boone, a researcher for
the National White Collar Crime Center in West Virginia. “There are gangs perpetrating crime over
the Internet. They might as well give up gun running. They can make money this way.”
“Phishing” is an old-fashioned scam that once targeted hundreds of people through fliers or the
U.S. mail. Today, online scammers phish for millions of prospective victims, sending emails that
appear to come from legitimate financial organizations, whether American Express, the IRS, Bank
of America Corp. or others. In a typical phishing expedition, a mass email instructs targets to click
on a link that directs them to a site that looks legitimate. In fact, these are fake websites, which can
deceive individuals into supplying personal financial information, account numbers, passwords, or
Social Security numbers.
Economic hardship means more people have less money to risk with shady deals. But economic
hardship also makes people more vulnerable – and scammers more desperate and creative – author-
ities said. Alabama’s Borg said the financial-market collapse in 2008 created new potential targets,
whether young working professionals distrustful of traditional stock and bond markets, baby boom-
ers panicking about insufficient retirement savings, the unemployed living on the edge, or retirees
dissatisfied with the historically low rates they are earning on their assets.
With Americans swimming in debt and earning less to repay it, regulators and consumer advo-
cates report a growing problem with scammers purporting to be debt- or mortgage-resolution firms.
These fraudulent firms charge an upfront fee but never deliver the financial service promised.
In a bad economy, “You’ve got a huge, huge market to tap if you’re a con artist,” Borg said.

2. FINANCIAL FRAUD: NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN

Ponzi scheme operators are by their nature brazen. Even so, Hamilton Alan Bird stood out from
the crowd. This was not because he siphoned $24 million from some 360 investors for his hedge
fund by promising to nearly double their money in less than a year. Nor was it because he used the
money to buy himself a Challenger 600 jet and prime Florida real estate.
What was most brazen about Bird’s fraud was that on Sept. 5, 2008 – just hours before a Colorado
judge sentenced him to 24 years in prison for a Ponzi scheme – he had convinced investors to put
$25,000 into a new scam. Bird was later sentenced to four more years in prison for the second scam,
which he had operated while his original criminal case was moving through the courts.
Bird’s success demonstrates the gullibility of unsuspecting individual investors, who leap at du-
bious opportunities to get ahead of the financial game. None of Bird’s investors apparently had seen
any of the numerous news articles revealing what he was up to.
“That was pretty egregious,” said Fred Joseph, who, until the Bird scheme, thought he’d seen it all
during 18 years as securities commissioner of Colorado.

4
 Bird used the well-worn tools of his trade to recruit “investors” in a non-existent hedge fund.
An array of familiar schemes like these pops up over and over again, year after year. This section
identifies and briefly describes four broad categories of these standard frauds. “The types of fraud
have not changed,” said John Gannon, former senior vice president of the FINRA Investor Education
Foundation. “What has changed are the communications tactics used to commit fraud.”
Consider perhaps the most famous investment scam of all. In the 1920s, an Italian immigrant
named Charles Ponzi operated his scheme out of an office near Boston’s City Hall, Mitchell Zuck-
off wrote in “Ponzi’s Scheme: The True Story of a Financial Legend.” Ponzi’s purported investment
strategy involved archaic “postal coupons” no longer in use. He was so adept at attracting money that
Boston media touted his purported financial genius. “WE GUARANTEE YOU 50 PERCENT PROFIT
IN 45 DAYS,” the Boston Traveler blared in a headline about Ponzi’s firm. The article went on, “We
haven’t figured out how they make their enormous profit, but they seem confident of their ability to
do so.” The basic Ponzi scheme persists today. For example, Madoff adopted Ponzi’s core strategy of
using new investors’ money to pay the high “returns” to early investors that are essential to keep the
deception alive.
The financial market collapse in 2008 exposed Madoff, who, like Ponzi, ultimately could not meet
his jittery investors’ demands that he return their money. The market collapse also exposed the
pervasiveness of Ponzi schemes during the economic boom early this decade. An Associated Press
analysis of 50 states found that tens of thousands of Ponzi investors “watched more than $16.5 bil-
lion disappear like smoke in 2009.” There is little doubt the Ponzi scheme will return, cloaked in a
new disguise, at a future date.
The following describes the four common categories of financial-product fraud against individu-
als, according to interviews with law enforcement:
A. All investment frauds have one thing in common: they sell something – a company, product,
or promised rate of return – that either doesn’t exist or will not live up to expectations. The
primary categories are:
• The Ponzi scheme promises extraordinary investment returns that may materialize ini-
tially, as long as the perpetrator can bring in new clients. But the scheme collapses when
new investors are no longer willing to supply new money to the investment scam to pay off
its earlier investors.
• Pump and dump scams occur when con men send out inflated and inaccurate information
about a company’s stock that they already own. Their reports hype the company’s profits
or business prospects with the goal of encouraging naive investors to rush in and buy the
stock. When they do, surging demand drives up the price. The fraudster sells his shares at
a large profit, leaving defrauded investors holding stock that inevitably collapses in price
once investors realize the hype is baseless.
• Fake or dubious investment companies sell shares, equity stakes, or debt, purportedly
backed by a hot new product, technology, or business opportunity. These scammers
sometimes go to great lengths to create the appearance the company they are touting is
real. In one major Massachusetts case, Secretary of State Francis Galvin reached a settle-
ment with a man who claimed to have special contracts to act as a broker and sell uniforms
for a Japanese manufacturer. He then allegedly sold promissory notes to investors who

5
 loaned him money to handle the uniforms. The entire story was fabricated, the SEC said.
“There are millions of cases like this,” the FBI’s Power said.
• High-yield investment fraud has become popular. Con men sell either a bond or a loan
and claim the securities have the contradictory characteristics of low risk and high yield.
The returns promised on these, as one Canadian regulator put it, are “so high it could not
be earned through legal means.”

B. Advance-fee scams comprise a second category of fraud.

• Debt-settlement scams became pervasive in the recession as consumers struggled to pay
credit card debts or carry mortgage balances that exceeded the value of their homes. To
solve consumers’ problems, fraudsters pose as debt experts or lawyers and offer to negoti-
ate on their behalf with a lender for an affordable payment schedule or reduction in debt.
Fraudulent debt negotiators require customers to pay an upfront fee but never handle the
problem. Advance-fee scams involving other financial products also exist, but the out-
come never varies: the fee is paid and the promised service is never delivered.
• The notorious Nigerian scam in which someone receives an email requesting they turn
over money or their bank account number is a form of advance-fee fraud, also documented
by Zuckoff, in The New Yorker magazine: Massachusetts psychotherapist John W. Worley
received an email from a Nigerian who purportedly needed help transferring $55 million
to the United States. If Worley would only provide money upfront to transfer the money,
he would be richly rewarded. He was not. “Advance-fee fraud is an especially durable
con,” Zuckoff wrote. “In an early variation, the Spanish Prisoner Letter, which dates to
the sixteenth century, scammers wrote to English gentry and pleaded for help in freeing a
fictitious wealthy countryman who was imprisoned in Spain.”

C. Insurance fraud typically involves someone staging a fake accident or arson fire to collect on
their policies illegally. But fraud is also perpetrated against individuals who buy insurance
policies.
• Premium payments are diverted when unscrupulous insurance agents or brokers sell a
purported health, auto, home or life-insurance policy and deposit the customer’s funds in
their personal bank accounts.
• Fabricated policy documents give the fraud target the impression that the coverage is in ef-
fect and encourage them to pay the monthly premiums, though no policy exists.
• Legitimate insurance products such as annuities and so-called viatical settlements can
serve as valuable options for people near or in retirement. But their complexity itself can
also be used to the con man’s advantage. In a viatical settlement, for example, the termi-
nally ill, such as AIDs patients or the elderly, are persuaded to assign the death benefits on
their life insurance policies to an investor in return for a lump sum to pay their living or
medical expenses. Regulators are increasingly alarmed that these products can provide
opportunities for con artists to victimize the sick or vulnerable. “That whole area is rife
with potential problems,” said Massachusetts Secretary of State Galvin.

6
 D. Tax fraud usually involves wealthy taxpayers who fabricate or exaggerate deductions or hide
their income illegally in the Caribbean to evade substantial IRS liabilities. But common tax
scams victimize low- or middle-income tax filers.
• In one such fraud, tax preparers use false deductions or manipulate a client’s income to
convince him that he is eligible for a large tax refund; the preparer then extracts a fee from
the inflated return, and the tax filer must repay the IRS for taxes owed due to the fraudu-
lent tax return.
• In another case, preparers in Arkansas, New York, and North Carolina made so-called
“Refund Anticipation Loans,” which charged fees or interest rates in violation of state
laws, according to the National Consumer Law Foundation, a Boston consumer organiza-
tion.

3. SCAMMERS’ DISGUISES

All successful con artists achieve the same goal: separating people from their money. But their
potential targets can prevent fraud if they recognize scammers’ disguises, the dazzling shrouds that
hide the same old frauds and deceptions over and over.
“Everything is a rehashing and a redressing of what’s come before,” said Boone at the National
White Collar Crime Center. “The technology changes. The phishing you have today is email but,
before the Internet, people were sending out flyers, saying, ‘Give us a call and we’ll help you make
more.’ It’s become more sophisticated. It’s a lot more subtle. They really are the same thing.”
So many scams are running all the time, it is impossible to present a comprehensive list of all the
disguises used. The following are six common ones. To illustrate each disguise, two sample cases
are described.

A. The Rescue Squad.

Scammers sensing an opportunity often sweep in during the weeks after a national disaster,
whether the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Hurricane Katrina, or an environmental catastrophe such as
the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. With all eyes trained on the disaster, the Rescue Squad pres-
ents a solution they claim will put untold profits into the pockets of individuals. In another varia-
tion, they devise products that offer a miracle solution to a prominent commercial or technical prob-
lem that is frequently in the news and familiar to most.
Con men “follow the headlines,” said Tanya Solov, director of the Illinois securities department.
Sometimes even the problem they are urgently trying to solve is a fabrication: Solov recalled an Il-
linois investigation into a company in the 1990s that tried to sell investors on using ostrich feathers
to clean compact discs. “I didn’t even know they needed cleaning,” she said.
• Red Flag: any financial offer that comes on the heels of catastrophe and attempts to capitalize
on that event is suspect.
• Financial Products Involved: company stock, Pay Pal, loans, private placements in company
stock or debt and other investment vehicles.
• Case 1: Gulf Oil Cleanup: In June 2010, two months after the explosion on the Gulf oil rig,
the Press-Register in Mobile, Alabama, reported that executives of a Chicago-area company,

7
 InfrAegis Inc., were in town pitching investors on a “bacterial consortium” that could elimi-
nate the oil pouring into the Gulf of Mexico. That same month, the Illinois Secretary of State
was ordering InfrAegis to halt the sale of unregistered securities in a wireless company. In
July, the Alabama Securities Commission followed with an order that InfrAegis executives
halt sales of securities in the oil-cleanup company, which regulators said were not registered.
The SEC in October filed charges that the company defrauded investors out of $20 million for
purported sales of homeland-security products. InfrAegis did not return several calls seek-
ing a comment to its headquarters in suburban Chicago.
• Case 2: Salvation Army: Days after Hurricane Katrina slammed the Gulf Coast, Texas broth-
ers Steven and Bartholomew Stephens registered a website, salvationarmyonline.org [italics
added], purporting to take in donations for hurricane victims; the Salvation Army’s actual
website is salvationarmy.org. The fake website accepted donations through an online PayPal
account that diverted them to the Stephens’ bank accounts. More than 250 people sent in
$48,000 before the fraud was discovered, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Texas. The
brothers began serving prison sentences in November 2007.

B. The Problem Solver.

Con men are experts in the psychology of their prey. The Problem Solver targets individuals in fi-
nancial distress who feel they have nowhere to turn for help. Fraud against those down on their luck
or wading in debt increased during the recession, law enforcement said. Senator Charles Schumer,
a New York Democrat, felt the problem was so pervasive that he sent out a public alert about auto-
mated “robocalls” by scammers charging an up-front fee to negotiate a lower interest rate on a credit
card, which “consumers can do on their own for free.”
• Red Flag: Problem Solvers offer simple solutions to what their victims should know are
complex financial problems, having tried, and failed, to remedy the problem themselves. Yet,
they want to believe a scammer who promises to take on their problem can solve it.
• Financial Products Involved: Credit cards, mortgages, pay-day loans, insurance.
• Case 1: Debt Resolution scams were common during the recession. An Alabama judge in
February 2010 permanently shut down what that state’s Attorney General called “one of the
largest debt settlement schemes in the nation” against 15,000 Americans mired in credit card
and personal debts. The Alabama Securities Commission, which had requested the action,
said the company promised “superior results” and convinced customers to pay millions in
upfront fees and then stop paying their debts, forcing the credit card company or other lend-
ers to settle. This plan failed and the customers’ credit ratings were ruined.
• Case 2: Online payday loans: Payday loan stores, a common site on street corners in low-
income neighborhoods, now operate on the Internet. Payday loans, which charge high fees
and interest rates for short-term loans, can be useful, but they can also trap borrowers into
falling even further behind on their bills. Online payday loan companies are especially dan-
gerous, regulators said, because customers that supply bank account or credit card numbers
are at the mercy of potential scammers who have authority to withdraw money from their
accounts. 500FastCash is one of numerous online payday lenders that have sparked hundreds
of complaints, the BBB warns on its website. BBB staff said they went to Oklahoma to talk

8
 to the company and found the Casino and Smoke Shop operated by the Modoc Indian Tribe;
the tribe said it was unaware of 500FastCash. The Bureau reported some FastCash customers
never received their loans, while others continued to receive unauthorized charges to their
credit cards after the loans were paid. Attempts by the Financial Security Project to contact the
company for a comment were unsuccessful. A customer service representative confirmed the
headquarters was in Miami, Okla.; the company did not return messages seeking comment.

C. The Senior Specialist.

Senior Specialists target victims for no other reason than that they’re one of more than 40 mil-
lion Americans over the age of 65 and, therefore, more likely to have money in the bank or equity in
their home. Fraud against seniors took off in the late 1990s, experts said. This prompted California
regulators to institute a Seniors Against Investment Fraud program in 2005, and the North American
Securities Administrators Association alerted seniors to check credentials for people they do busi-
ness with.
• Red Flag: Fraudulent senior specialists claim to possess special training to help seniors deal
with their specific problems. Knowing seniors tend to be risk-averse, they ease seniors’
fears by promising the financial products they are peddling are “low-risk” or “no-risk.” Or
they lure them with promises of larger returns than they currently earn from their traditional
stocks, municipal bonds, and certificates of deposit.
• Financial Products Involved: Stocks, bonds, private placements in company stock or debt,
insurance, high-yield investments.
• Case 1: Financial adviser: Jeffrey Gordon Butler’s clients in southern California trusted him.
After all, he had helped them prepare their wills and trusts. When he said he had found an
investment that paid 12 percent, 124 clients turned over some $11 million. It was a Ponzi
scheme, and their savings vanished. “We fell for it,” Ann Poor, a retired school teacher who
lost more than $300,000, told The Orange County Register. Butler, who is serving 90 years in
prison, used a typical Ponzi ploy to keep investors in the game: new investors supplied cash
to pay off earlier investors and keep them happy. “For a while, we were getting $740 a month
in interest, and that was real good. So, we went ahead and gave him most of the rest of our
money,” Poor said.
• Case 2: Investment advisor: In October 2010, Stephen Clifford was sentenced to prison time
related to a $3 million scheme in which the SEC alleges he acted as an investment advisor for
seniors, including one woman who wanted to give money to her children. He promised the
money would earn about 7 percent annually – better than the return from traditional markets
but not so high that it raised red flags. Clifford posed as a financial adviser to seniors, “assur-
ing them that he would select appropriate securities for their financial needs and tolerance
for risk,” the SEC said.

D. The Magician.

The Magician often tantalizes customers with a free lunch, steak dinner or educational seminar.
If he can persuade them to attend, he can personally charm them with offers to perform magic, ef-
fectively giving something for nothing.
9
 • Red Flag: A high return, at no risk to the senior, is impossible in the investment world. But
the Magician lures his prey using terms such as “minimum guaranteed return,” “triple your
investment,” “profits guaranteed,” or “can’t lose any money.”
• Financial Products Involved: Company stock, private equity or debt placements, high-yield
investments.
• Case 1: “Outlandish” returns: Some 40,000 people in more than 120 countries believed
Nicolas Smirnow’s sales pitch on his website, “Path to Prosperity, or “P 2 P,” and lost more
than $70 million in the global fraud, according to the complaint filed by the U.S. Attorney’s
Office in Southern Illinois. Authorities said Smirnow allowed customers to select their
investment plan: a seven-day plan supposedly earned 546 percent; a 60-day plan earned
720 percent. A resident of the Philippines, Smirnow, whom authorities said operated out of
Canada and the Philippines, and whose website was based in the Netherlands, could not be
located to comment on the allegations.
• Case 2: “Unique investment strategy:” An $8 billion fraud case filed against Texas financier
R. Allen Stanford in February 2009 was one of the most highly publicized to emerge from the
fallout of the financial market collapse. The SEC said Stanford touted a “unique investment
strategy” to sell high-yield certificates of deposit and claimed he earned fantastic returns,
even though clients were losing money; the trial began in January. Stanford has fiercely
denied the SEC charges and filed a lawsuit accusing the agency of using “illegal tactics” in
pursuing its case.

E. God’s Messenger.

Fraud inside religious organizations generated publicity in the late 1990s and persists today.
Scammers see church pews lined with potential victims, and they exploit a unique vulnerability
shared by congregants: trust. God’s Messenger often shows up in the guise of a minister or friendly
fellow or congregant who has stumbled onto a fabulous deal. “People tend to not do the due dili-
gence,” when they meet a scammer at church, Keith Woodwell, director of the Utah Division of Secu-
rities, said. The duped individual mistakenly thinks, “I can trust him.”
• Red Flag: Anyone selling financial products at a place of worship may be suspect. Scammers
often co-opt congregants to describe how much money they’ve made, which gives legitimacy
to the scheme.
• Financial Products Involved: All products.
• Case 1: High-Level Fraud: A former bishop at the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day
Saints, Shawn R. Merriman, pleaded guilty to operating a more than $17 million Ponzi
scheme in which he used his rank within the church to take in Mormons, news reports said.
Authorities said he operated the scheme for 15 years, promising more than 100 investors in
Colorado, Minnesota and Utah returns of 7 percent to 20 percent every year on stocks and
bonds he purchased on their behalf. He never bought the securities and instead used their
money to buy an Idaho cabin, classic cars, including an Aston Martin, and religious art, in-
cluding two Rembrandts, which he exhibited at LDS Centers in Denver and at the Museum of
Church History and Art in Salt Lake City.

10
 • Case 2: Rewards for “God’s Work:” An Arizona judge in 2006 sentenced two former top of-
ficials of the Baptist Foundation of Arizona for a scam that mixed religion and money. When
The Washington Post reported the scam, which tricked some 11,000 investors out of $585
million, it was one of the largest church-based scams in history. Salesmen quoted the Bible
to persuade donors to invest in the foundation; they would, they said, receive extraordinary
financial rewards for doing “God’s work,” such as building churches and retirement homes.
William Pierre Crotts, the foundation’s president, was sentenced to eight years, and Thomas
Dale Grabinski, former chief legal counsel, received six years.

F. The Confidant.

When securities regulators discuss the serious matter of financial fraud, an inside joke invari-
ably comes up. Why, they ask, don’t fraud victims wonder why someone who has found the secret to
untold wealth is willing to share it? That paradox explains why the Confidant’s tactic is so success-
ful: con men who claim to share a secret are transmitting the message that their unwitting victim is
special.
• Red Flag: The Confidant often asks his victim not to tell anyone else about their exclusive
arrangement. He or she may say the victim is lucky to be a member of an exclusive club or a
group of people capable of understanding the offer, or possessing enough money to benefit
from it.
• Financial Products Involved: Private placements of stocks or bonds, debt resolution, insur-
ance, bank notes.
• Case 1: “Turn Debt into Wealth:” In Massachusetts, a “personal coach” told a prospective
client he could “turn debt into wealth.” Darin Floyd Beal recommended that a 59-year-old
client extract $100,000 in equity from her home to make this profitable investment, accord-
ing to an April 2009 complaint filed by the Massachusetts Securities Division, which sus-
pended his broker’s license. In an email, Beal created the air of exclusivity: the deal “only al-
lows what are called ‘accredited investors’ so you have to have deep pockets to invest in them.
So what I am proposing is that you invest the money through me and I will do the investing for
you,” the complaint said. In April 2009, the Massachusetts securities division ordered Beal to
cease operations in the state; the case is now settled, the division said. An unidentified fam-
ily member at Beal’s Utah residence said he settled the case but “didn’t admit to the allega-
tions;” Beal did not return a message left for him personally.
• Case 2: Elite Banks: The Confidant is master of the so-called prime bank scheme, which
became popular in the late 1990s. The scheme lured investors to deposit their money in se-
cretive, exclusive overseas banks purportedly doing business with Saudi sheiks or the Roth-
schilds. In one Texas case, convicted scammers promised 30 percent per month, guaranteed
by a major European bank or Caribbean insurer, according to the SEC. “Because there was no
real investment, some investors received partial, ‘Ponzi’ payments, and others received noth-
ing,” the SEC said. The perpetrators used the money to buy houses, cars and boats, the agency
said.

11
 TIPS FOR AVOIDING SCAMS

Fraud schemes share similar warning signs. Potential victims who recognize them may be
prompted to investigate an offer for a financial product before buying it, contact regulators, or
walk away. Boston College’s Financial Security Project compiled a list of 10 red flags based on tips
provided by securities regulators, attorneys general and anti-fraud watchdogs around the country.
Potentially fraudulent deals:
1. Look too good to be true. Scam products or investments usually appear far more lucrative
than standard products on the market. Click here for more information from Finra.
2. Offer a high or “guaranteed” return at “no risk” to the investor. This is virtually impos-
sible since the riskiest investments produce the biggest rewards – and failure rates – and
safe investments typically offer predictable but modest rewards. Check out a broker.
3. Require an urgent response or cash payment. Offers by high-pressure salesmen should
be avoided altogether. Responsible financial advisors do not rush prospective clients into
hasty, and regrettable, decisions.
4. Charge a steep upfront fee in return for the promise of making more money at some
unspecified date in the future. An honest contractor will ask you not to pay for a kitchen
renovation until the work is done – ditto for financial products.
5. Suggest recipients do not tell family members or friends about the offer. Ask yourself,
what is this person trying to hide? Probably a fraud.
6. Lure prospective investors with a “free lunch.” Con men set these up to make their
fraudulent pitches in person and increase their chances of success. Watch “Tricks of the
Trade” by NBC’s Dateline. Remember, there is no such thing as a “free lunch.”
7. Come unsolicited over the Internet, are of unknown origin, or come from overseas or
from an individual or company that is in any way unusual or suspect. Anyone can hack a
computer and send out an email message – and con men often do.
8. Instill fear that a failure to act would be very costly. Coercion is not used as a tactic by
someone giving sound financial advice.
9. Resist being questioned or checked out further. Con men flee when someone starts ask-
ing serious and detailed questions. Watch Chapter 1 of “Fraud Scene Investigator” to learn
more. Legitimate brokers or advisers, on the other hand, will patiently answer questions.
10. Are so complex that it is difficult or impossible to understand. Scammers often dazzle
or intimidate their targets with their superior knowledge of finance or with complex math-
ematical explanations. A good rule for any financial transaction: if you don’t understand it,
don’t do it.

The Center for Retirement Research thanks AARP, InvescoSM, LPL Financial, Mercer, MetLife,
MFS Investment Management, National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association, Prudential Financial, Putnam
Investments, State Street, TIAA-CREF Institute, T. Rowe Price, and USAA for support of this project.

© 2012, by Trustees of Boston College, Center for Retirement Research. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may
be quoted without explicit permission provided that the authors are identified and full credit, including copyright notice, is given to Trustees of Boston
College, Center for Retirement Research. The research reported herein was supported by the Center’s Partnership Program. The findings and conclu-
sions expressed are solely those of the author and do not represent the views or policy of the partners or the Center for Retirement Research at Boston
College.